Okay here's a dumb question that has been on my mind (and certainly not just my mind) ever since the iPhone 7 announcement - what prevented Apple from implementing water resistance a year or even two ago? I'm dead serious about this question - was there any design element or anything specific that made it impossible for iPhone 6 or 6S? As elementary as this question is, I haven't seen or heard any rational explanation so far. Personally I could live without this feature, but I don't see why Apple is making such a big deal out of it now that Samsung or Sony have been using it for years (not to mention that the new iPhone still has only IP67 rating and not IP68). And I can't believe Apple was just too lazy to implement it.
Because they were obviously focused on other things? Also, the 6s is fairly water resistant, though they don't broadcast it. Samsung's failed tests btw, so ...
See, this is the problem. I'm looking for a rational explanation and this is what I get. Well guess what, other companies are focusing on many other things as well, yet they still deliver and aren't afraid to even set the trend. Apple has all the money and talent to develop and implement pretty much whatever they want, so saying they had different priorities is a pretty lame excuse. And if that's the case then they should have simply rolled out this feature silently instead of making it look like they just invented something nobody else has. Don't get me wrong, I'm still a strong Apple supporter and own more Apple products than any other brand combined, but if there's any indication Apple is becoming somewhat clueless about where to go next with the iPhone, it must be this year's iPhone 7 event. And this iPhone 7 ad just make matters that much worse imho.
You aren't looking for a rational explanation. You're trolling. If you were looking for a rational explanation. You'd add up the facts that have already been presented here to you, along with a bit of common sense, and you'd understand why water resistance hasn't been claimed until now.
1. Samsung's phones, which claim an even higher ability to resist water damage, failed at providing even the water resistance now claimed by Apple. This should suggest to you that a phone with a headphone jack, charging port, movable Home button, and other buttons and mute/vibrate switch is not easy to make water resistant.
2. Apple's iPhone 6S survived, in many tests (you need only access to YouTube) a 30-second full immersion in a bowl of water. So Apple had previously taken steps toward water resistance, but acted conservatively in not claiming so in the previous generation.
3. In what manner was Apple, claiming water resistance as 1 of 10 enhancements to iPhone 7 "making it look like they just invented something nobody else has."
4. How is Apple NOT setting trends with
a) the first 64-bit smartphone (or had you forgotten),
b) the first, and best functioning, fingerprint sensor on a globally shipping smartphone. Someone else did one prior, but it didn't work well and wasn't widely shipped, and that makes ALL the difference,
c) the whole concept of vertical hardware/software/services integration, which makes iPhone perform better and use less power per unit of computing performance. That's something important to environmentally aware Apple, but apparently not to other companies, who are happy to just shove a bigger battery in their devices, and then try to charge that bigger battery fast, resulting in a global recall.
See, this is the problem. I'm looking for a rational explanation and this is what I get. Well guess what, other companies are focusing on many other things as well, yet they still deliver and aren't afraid to even set the trend. Apple has all the money and talent to develop and implement pretty much whatever they want, so saying they had different priorities is a pretty lame excuse. And if that's the case then they should have simply rolled out this feature silently instead of making it look like they just invented something nobody else has. Don't get me wrong, I'm still a strong Apple supporter and own more Apple products than any other brand combined, but if there's any indication Apple is becoming somewhat clueless about where to go next with the iPhone, it must be this year's iPhone 7 event. And this iPhone 7 ad just make matters that much worse imho.
You might also ask why the first one wasn't. Much more important, why wasn't the first Apple Watch? I guess it's a refinement from year to year working in that direction. The downside of this will be that I probably won't ever self repair an iPhone again. I don't think it'll be water resistant after having opened up...
But that's not the point. Sure, we may ask why Apple wasn't first to introduce waterproof technology, but that's for a separate discussion. What I'm saying is that Apple is now proudly advertising how they have just made a waterproof phone and in my opinion that's what's discrediting them. Maybe they assume their own users are not even aware of what the competition has to offer, but if this is their main selling point now, then Apple makes it look like there isn't much the new iPhone has to offer, which isn't true of course.
You're trolling. It's obvious when you suggest that water resistance is Apple's main selling point. There were 10 points, counted down as such, in their intro event. And you can be sure more of those points will show up in subsequent advertisements. So it's disingenuous to suggest, after a single intro advertisement, that Apple is using water resistance as its main selling point.
What I'm saying is they should not use it as a selling point at all. For obvious reasons that I already explained. So next year they'll make wireless charging their next major selling point? I mean come on people, this is just plain silly what's happening here. I'm also still trying to understand what prevented Apple from implementing the waterproof technology much earlier. Still haven't seen a single reasonable response in that matter.
See, this is the problem. I'm looking for a rational explanation and this is what I get. Well guess what, other companies are focusing on many other things as well, yet they still deliver and aren't afraid to even set the trend. Apple has all the money and talent to develop and implement pretty much whatever they want, so saying they had different priorities is a pretty lame excuse. And if that's the case then they should have simply rolled out this feature silently instead of making it look like they just invented something nobody else has. Don't get me wrong, I'm still a strong Apple supporter and own more Apple products than any other brand combined, but if there's any indication Apple is becoming somewhat clueless about where to go next with the iPhone, it must be this year's iPhone 7 event. And this iPhone 7 ad just make matters that much worse imho.
You might also ask why the first one wasn't. Much more important, why wasn't the first Apple Watch? I guess it's a refinement from year to year working in that direction. The downside of this will be that I probably won't ever self repair an iPhone again. I don't think it'll be water resistant after having opened up...
But that's not the point. Sure, we may ask why Apple wasn't first to introduce waterproof technology, but that's for a separate discussion. What I'm saying is that Apple is now proudly advertising how they have just made a waterproof phone and in my opinion that's what's discrediting them. Maybe they assume their own users are not even aware of what the competition has to offer, but if this is their main selling point now, then Apple makes it look like there isn't much the new iPhone has to offer, which isn't true of course.
You're trolling. It's obvious when you suggest that water resistance is Apple's main selling point. There were 10 points, counted down as such, in their intro event. And you can be sure more of those points will show up in subsequent advertisements. So it's disingenuous to suggest, after a single intro advertisement, that Apple is using water resistance as its main selling point.
And just out of curiosity - which one of Phil Schiller's 10 points do you expect to be advertised next? Stereo speakers? New colors? I can see the AirPods as the only other significant selling point, but that's not even an iPhone 7 feature per say.
Okay here's a dumb question that has been on my mind (and certainly not just my mind) ever since the iPhone 7 announcement - what prevented Apple from implementing water resistance a year or even two ago? I'm dead serious about this question - was there any design element or anything specific that made it impossible for iPhone 6 or 6S? As elementary as this question is, I haven't seen or heard any rational explanation so far. Personally I could live without this feature, but I don't see why Apple is making such a big deal out of it now that Samsung or Sony have been using it for years (not to mention that the new iPhone still has only IP67 rating and not IP68). And I can't believe Apple was just too lazy to implement it.
Because they were obviously focused on other things? Also, the 6s is fairly water resistant, though they don't broadcast it. Samsung's failed tests btw, so ...
See, this is the problem. I'm looking for a rational explanation and this is what I get. Well guess what, other companies are focusing on many other things as well, yet they still deliver and aren't afraid to even set the trend. Apple has all the money and talent to develop and implement pretty much whatever they want, so saying they had different priorities is a pretty lame excuse. And if that's the case then they should have simply rolled out this feature silently instead of making it look like they just invented something nobody else has. Don't get me wrong, I'm still a strong Apple supporter and own more Apple products than any other brand combined, but if there's any indication Apple is becoming somewhat clueless about where to go next with the iPhone, it must be this year's iPhone 7 event. And this iPhone 7 ad just make matters that much worse imho.
You aren't looking for a rational explanation. You're trolling. If you were looking for a rational explanation. You'd add up the facts that have already been presented here to you, along with a bit of common sense, and you'd understand why water resistance hasn't been claimed until now.
1. Samsung's phones, which claim an even higher ability to resist water damage, failed at providing even the water resistance now claimed by Apple. This should suggest to you that a phone with a headphone jack, charging port, movable Home button, and other buttons and mute/vibrate switch is not easy to make water resistant.
2. Apple's iPhone 6S survived, in many tests (you need only access to YouTube) a 30-second full immersion in a bowl of water. So Apple had previously taken steps toward water resistance, but acted conservatively in not claiming so in the previous generation.
3. In what manner was Apple, claiming water resistance as 1 of 10 enhancements to iPhone 7 "making it look like they just invented something nobody else has."
4. How is Apple NOT setting trends with
a) the first 64-bit smartphone (or had you forgotten),
b) the first, and best functioning, fingerprint sensor on a globally shipping smartphone. Someone else did one prior, but it didn't work well and wasn't widely shipped, and that makes ALL the difference,
c) the whole concept of vertical hardware/software/services integration, which makes iPhone perform better and use less power per unit of computing performance. That's something important to environmentally aware Apple, but apparently not to other companies, who are happy to just shove a bigger battery in their devices, and then try to charge that bigger battery fast, resulting in a global recall.
I could go on...
Sorry but your long post lacks any substance. So you're claiming iPhone7 is more waterproof than what Apple's competition has been offering for years and is even ranked higher in terms of the waterproof rankings. Well, if that's what you believe in, then I guess the waterproof rankings must be all wrong and you're the expert. Your remaining points only digress from the original topic and you try to explain to me where Apple was first. Sure, I'm well aware of all those, but that's completely unrelated to what we're discussing here. You still haven't answered why Apple wasn't able to implement this technology years ago and why they're only talking so much about waterproofing their new iPhone now and even releasing ads about it. What I'm trying to understand is if there were any limitations preventing them from doing so (although I can't imagine what would it be) or they simply ignored the industry trends for so long.
See, this is the problem. I'm looking for a rational explanation and this is what I get. Well guess what, other companies are focusing on many other things as well, yet they still deliver and aren't afraid to even set the trend. Apple has all the money and talent to develop and implement pretty much whatever they want, so saying they had different priorities is a pretty lame excuse. And if that's the case then they should have simply rolled out this feature silently instead of making it look like they just invented something nobody else has. Don't get me wrong, I'm still a strong Apple supporter and own more Apple products than any other brand combined, but if there's any indication Apple is becoming somewhat clueless about where to go next with the iPhone, it must be this year's iPhone 7 event. And this iPhone 7 ad just make matters that much worse imho.
You might also ask why the first one wasn't. Much more important, why wasn't the first Apple Watch? I guess it's a refinement from year to year working in that direction. The downside of this will be that I probably won't ever self repair an iPhone again. I don't think it'll be water resistant after having opened up...
But that's not the point. Sure, we may ask why Apple wasn't first to introduce waterproof technology, but that's for a separate discussion. What I'm saying is that Apple is now proudly advertising how they have just made a waterproof phone and in my opinion that's what's discrediting them. Maybe they assume their own users are not even aware of what the competition has to offer, but if this is their main selling point now, then Apple makes it look like there isn't much the new iPhone has to offer, which isn't true of course.
You're trolling. It's obvious when you suggest that water resistance is Apple's main selling point. There were 10 points, counted down as such, in their intro event. And you can be sure more of those points will show up in subsequent advertisements. So it's disingenuous to suggest, after a single intro advertisement, that Apple is using water resistance as its main selling point.
What I'm saying is they should not use it as a selling point at all. For obvious reasons that I already explained. So next year they'll make wireless charging their next major selling point? I mean come on people, this is just plain silly what's happening here. I'm also still trying to understand what prevented Apple from implementing the waterproof technology much earlier. Still haven't seen a single reasonable response in that matter.
What I'm saying is they should not use it as a selling point at all. For obvious reasons that I already explained. ... I'm also still trying to understand what prevented Apple from implementing the waterproof technology much earlier.
Ha ha! Now you're just being silly. Why shouldn't Apple advertise a feature of the iPhone 7?
Do you also have a list of features other manufacturers should not have advertised in their own phones? (Not that I care, I have an iPhone and don't really follow other manufacturers.)
Also, why does it matter at all why Apple didn't implement "waterproofing technology" prior to this? That seems irrelevant. Here's why: because they didn't. Just like the iPhone 6+/6s+ didn't have dual cameras.
Okay here's a dumb question that has been on my mind (and certainly not just my mind) ever since the iPhone 7 announcement - what prevented Apple from implementing water resistance a year or even two ago? I'm dead serious about this question - was there any design element or anything specific that made it impossible for iPhone 6 or 6S? As elementary as this question is, I haven't seen or heard any rational explanation so far. Personally I could live without this feature, but I don't see why Apple is making such a big deal out of it now that Samsung or Sony have been using it for years (not to mention that the new iPhone still has only IP67 rating and not IP68). And I can't believe Apple was just too lazy to implement it.
The headphone jack was a biggie. The only solution is to put an ugly and inelegant rubber plug into the headphone jack. Also, if I recall correctly, Samsung's waterproof claims were shown to be bogus when tested by a third party.
See, this is the problem. I'm looking for a rational explanation and this is what I get. Well guess what, other companies are focusing on many other things as well, yet they still deliver and aren't afraid to even set the trend. Apple has all the money and talent to develop and implement pretty much whatever they want, so saying they had different priorities is a pretty lame excuse. And if that's the case then they should have simply rolled out this feature silently instead of making it look like they just invented something nobody else has. Don't get me wrong, I'm still a strong Apple supporter and own more Apple products than any other brand combined, but if there's any indication Apple is becoming somewhat clueless about where to go next with the iPhone, it must be this year's iPhone 7 event. And this iPhone 7 ad just make matters that much worse imho.
You might also ask why the first one wasn't. Much more important, why wasn't the first Apple Watch? I guess it's a refinement from year to year working in that direction. The downside of this will be that I probably won't ever self repair an iPhone again. I don't think it'll be water resistant after having opened up...
But that's not the point. Sure, we may ask why Apple wasn't first to introduce waterproof technology, but that's for a separate discussion. What I'm saying is that Apple is now proudly advertising how they have just made a waterproof phone and in my opinion that's what's discrediting them. Maybe they assume their own users are not even aware of what the competition has to offer, but if this is their main selling point now, then Apple makes it look like there isn't much the new iPhone has to offer, which isn't true of course.
You're trolling. It's obvious when you suggest that water resistance is Apple's main selling point. There were 10 points, counted down as such, in their intro event. And you can be sure more of those points will show up in subsequent advertisements. So it's disingenuous to suggest, after a single intro advertisement, that Apple is using water resistance as its main selling point.
What I'm saying is they should not use it as a selling point at all. For obvious reasons that I already explained. So next year they'll make wireless charging their next major selling point? I mean come on people, this is just plain silly what's happening here. I'm also still trying to understand what prevented Apple from implementing the waterproof technology much earlier. Still haven't seen a single reasonable response in that matter.
So no car company should use autonomous driving as a selling point in the future, because it's been done by Tesla? And did you even see how you jumped from selling point back to major selling point? Who do you think you're fooling with your so obvious obtuseness?
Okay here's a dumb question that has been on my mind (and certainly not just my mind) ever since the iPhone 7 announcement - what prevented Apple from implementing water resistance a year or even two ago? I'm dead serious about this question - was there any design element or anything specific that made it impossible for iPhone 6 or 6S? As elementary as this question is, I haven't seen or heard any rational explanation so far. Personally I could live without this feature, but I don't see why Apple is making such a big deal out of it now that Samsung or Sony have been using it for years (not to mention that the new iPhone still has only IP67 rating and not IP68). And I can't believe Apple was just too lazy to implement it.
Because they were obviously focused on other things? Also, the 6s is fairly water resistant, though they don't broadcast it. Samsung's failed tests btw, so ...
See, this is the problem. I'm looking for a rational explanation and this is what I get. Well guess what, other companies are focusing on many other things as well, yet they still deliver and aren't afraid to even set the trend. Apple has all the money and talent to develop and implement pretty much whatever they want, so saying they had different priorities is a pretty lame excuse. And if that's the case then they should have simply rolled out this feature silently instead of making it look like they just invented something nobody else has. Don't get me wrong, I'm still a strong Apple supporter and own more Apple products than any other brand combined, but if there's any indication Apple is becoming somewhat clueless about where to go next with the iPhone, it must be this year's iPhone 7 event. And this iPhone 7 ad just make matters that much worse imho.
You aren't looking for a rational explanation. You're trolling. If you were looking for a rational explanation. You'd add up the facts that have already been presented here to you, along with a bit of common sense, and you'd understand why water resistance hasn't been claimed until now.
1. Samsung's phones, which claim an even higher ability to resist water damage, failed at providing even the water resistance now claimed by Apple. This should suggest to you that a phone with a headphone jack, charging port, movable Home button, and other buttons and mute/vibrate switch is not easy to make water resistant.
2. Apple's iPhone 6S survived, in many tests (you need only access to YouTube) a 30-second full immersion in a bowl of water. So Apple had previously taken steps toward water resistance, but acted conservatively in not claiming so in the previous generation.
3. In what manner was Apple, claiming water resistance as 1 of 10 enhancements to iPhone 7 "making it look like they just invented something nobody else has."
4. How is Apple NOT setting trends with
a) the first 64-bit smartphone (or had you forgotten),
b) the first, and best functioning, fingerprint sensor on a globally shipping smartphone. Someone else did one prior, but it didn't work well and wasn't widely shipped, and that makes ALL the difference,
c) the whole concept of vertical hardware/software/services integration, which makes iPhone perform better and use less power per unit of computing performance. That's something important to environmentally aware Apple, but apparently not to other companies, who are happy to just shove a bigger battery in their devices, and then try to charge that bigger battery fast, resulting in a global recall.
I could go on...
Sorry but your long post lacks any substance. So you're claiming iPhone7 is more waterproof than what Apple's competition has been offering for years and is even ranked higher in terms of the waterproof rankings. Well, if that's what you believe in, then I guess the waterproof rankings must be all wrong and you're the expert. Your remaining points only digress from the original topic and you try to explain to me where Apple was first. Sure, I'm well aware of all those, but that's completely unrelated to what we're discussing here. You still haven't answered why Apple wasn't able to implement this technology years ago and why they're only talking so much about waterproofing their new iPhone now and even releasing ads about it. What I'm trying to understand is if there were any limitations preventing them from doing so (although I can't imagine what would it be) or they simply ignored the industry trends for so long.
You're done here. You've offered nothing, made no sense, and shown that you do not respond to logic or common sense. Bye.
Okay here's a dumb question that has been on my mind (and certainly not just my mind) ever since the iPhone 7 announcement - what prevented Apple from implementing water resistance a year or even two ago? I'm dead serious about this question - was there any design element or anything specific that made it impossible for iPhone 6 or 6S? As elementary as this question is, I haven't seen or heard any rational explanation so far. Personally I could live without this feature, but I don't see why Apple is making such a big deal out of it now that Samsung or Sony have been using it for years (not to mention that the new iPhone still has only IP67 rating and not IP68). And I can't believe Apple was just too lazy to implement it.
Okay here's a dumb question that has been on my mind (and certainly not just my mind) ever since the iPhone 7 announcement - what prevented Apple from implementing water resistance a year or even two ago? I'm dead serious about this question - was there any design element or anything specific that made it impossible for iPhone 6 or 6S? As elementary as this question is, I haven't seen or heard any rational explanation so far. Personally I could live without this feature, but I don't see why Apple is making such a big deal out of it now that Samsung or Sony have been using it for years (not to mention that the new iPhone still has only IP67 rating and not IP68). And I can't believe Apple was just too lazy to implement it.
Because they were obviously focused on other things? Also, the 6s is fairly water resistant, though they don't broadcast it. Samsung's failed tests btw, so ...
See, this is the problem. I'm looking for a rational explanation and this is what I get. Well guess what, other companies are focusing on many other things as well, yet they still deliver and aren't afraid to even set the trend. Apple has all the money and talent to develop and implement pretty much whatever they want, so saying they had different priorities is a pretty lame excuse. And if that's the case then they should have simply rolled out this feature silently instead of making it look like they just invented something nobody else has. Don't get me wrong, I'm still a strong Apple supporter and own more Apple products than any other brand combined, but if there's any indication Apple is becoming somewhat clueless about where to go next with the iPhone, it must be this year's iPhone 7 event. And this iPhone 7 ad just make matters that much worse imho.
You aren't looking for a rational explanation. You're trolling. If you were looking for a rational explanation. You'd add up the facts that have already been presented here to you, along with a bit of common sense, and you'd understand why water resistance hasn't been claimed until now.
1. Samsung's phones, which claim an even higher ability to resist water damage, failed at providing even the water resistance now claimed by Apple. This should suggest to you that a phone with a headphone jack, charging port, movable Home button, and other buttons and mute/vibrate switch is not easy to make water resistant.
2. Apple's iPhone 6S survived, in many tests (you need only access to YouTube) a 30-second full immersion in a bowl of water. So Apple had previously taken steps toward water resistance, but acted conservatively in not claiming so in the previous generation.
3. In what manner was Apple, claiming water resistance as 1 of 10 enhancements to iPhone 7 "making it look like they just invented something nobody else has."
4. How is Apple NOT setting trends with
a) the first 64-bit smartphone (or had you forgotten),
b) the first, and best functioning, fingerprint sensor on a globally shipping smartphone. Someone else did one prior, but it didn't work well and wasn't widely shipped, and that makes ALL the difference,
c) the whole concept of vertical hardware/software/services integration, which makes iPhone perform better and use less power per unit of computing performance. That's something important to environmentally aware Apple, but apparently not to other companies, who are happy to just shove a bigger battery in their devices, and then try to charge that bigger battery fast, resulting in a global recall.
I could go on...
Sorry but your long post lacks any substance. So you're claiming iPhone7 is more waterproof than what Apple's competition has been offering for years and is even ranked higher in terms of the waterproof rankings. Well, if that's what you believe in, then I guess the waterproof rankings must be all wrong and you're the expert. Your remaining points only digress from the original topic and you try to explain to me where Apple was first. Sure, I'm well aware of all those, but that's completely unrelated to what we're discussing here. You still haven't answered why Apple wasn't able to implement this technology years ago and why they're only talking so much about waterproofing their new iPhone now and even releasing ads about it. What I'm trying to understand is if there were any limitations preventing them from doing so (although I can't imagine what would it be) or they simply ignored the industry trends for so long.
You're done here. You've offered nothing, made no sense, and shown that you do not respond to logic or common sense. Bye.
Well you're right, I'm done here, because apparently nobody is able to come up with reasonable answers to my questions. All I see here is various people blindly defending whatever Apple did (or didn't do, for that matter) and, at the same time, doubting industry standards and competing products at any cost and without any proper arguments. But I'm the troll here. Well fine then, let's all celebrate Apple for re-inventing waterproof smartphones and selling it as one of their major "new" features. Because you know, it's ok that advertising waterproof smartphones was a thing in 2014 and maybe 2015, Apple can still make it a novelty in 2016, right? Like I said, looking forward to their revolutionary wireless charging next year. Oh and revolutionary OLED screens as well, while we're at it. Some of you guys just don't seem to get the point I guess.
I don't need to see revolutionary new products from Apple every year. All I need is a reliable platform and Apple is still the only one I know. I'm fine with what Apple is today, I don't need the iPhone to become the next Xperia or Galaxy. But what I really don't like is when Apple plays catch up (nothing wrong with that) AND tries to turn it into their competitive advantage. That way I feel they're simply fooling their own customers. That's why I was trying to understand if there was any particular reason why they didn't implement this earlier. But I get it now, there's simply no reason.
Okay here's a dumb question that has been on my mind (and certainly not just my mind) ever since the iPhone 7 announcement - what prevented Apple from implementing water resistance a year or even two ago? I'm dead serious about this question - was there any design element or anything specific that made it impossible for iPhone 6 or 6S? As elementary as this question is, I haven't seen or heard any rational explanation so far. Personally I could live without this feature, but I don't see why Apple is making such a big deal out of it now that Samsung or Sony have been using it for years (not to mention that the new iPhone still has only IP67 rating and not IP68). And I can't believe Apple was just too lazy to implement it.
Because they were obviously focused on other things? Also, the 6s is fairly water resistant, though they don't broadcast it. Samsung's failed tests btw, so ...
See, this is the problem. I'm looking for a rational explanation and this is what I get. Well guess what, other companies are focusing on many other things as well, yet they still deliver and aren't afraid to even set the trend. Apple has all the money and talent to develop and implement pretty much whatever they want, so saying they had different priorities is a pretty lame excuse. And if that's the case then they should have simply rolled out this feature silently instead of making it look like they just invented something nobody else has. Don't get me wrong, I'm still a strong Apple supporter and own more Apple products than any other brand combined, but if there's any indication Apple is becoming somewhat clueless about where to go next with the iPhone, it must be this year's iPhone 7 event. And this iPhone 7 ad just make matters that much worse imho.
You aren't looking for a rational explanation. You're trolling. If you were looking for a rational explanation. You'd add up the facts that have already been presented here to you, along with a bit of common sense, and you'd understand why water resistance hasn't been claimed until now.
1. Samsung's phones, which claim an even higher ability to resist water damage, failed at providing even the water resistance now claimed by Apple. This should suggest to you that a phone with a headphone jack, charging port, movable Home button, and other buttons and mute/vibrate switch is not easy to make water resistant.
2. Apple's iPhone 6S survived, in many tests (you need only access to YouTube) a 30-second full immersion in a bowl of water. So Apple had previously taken steps toward water resistance, but acted conservatively in not claiming so in the previous generation.
3. In what manner was Apple, claiming water resistance as 1 of 10 enhancements to iPhone 7 "making it look like they just invented something nobody else has."
4. How is Apple NOT setting trends with
a) the first 64-bit smartphone (or had you forgotten),
b) the first, and best functioning, fingerprint sensor on a globally shipping smartphone. Someone else did one prior, but it didn't work well and wasn't widely shipped, and that makes ALL the difference,
c) the whole concept of vertical hardware/software/services integration, which makes iPhone perform better and use less power per unit of computing performance. That's something important to environmentally aware Apple, but apparently not to other companies, who are happy to just shove a bigger battery in their devices, and then try to charge that bigger battery fast, resulting in a global recall.
I could go on...
Sorry but your long post lacks any substance. So you're claiming iPhone7 is more waterproof than what Apple's competition has been offering for years and is even ranked higher in terms of the waterproof rankings. Well, if that's what you believe in, then I guess the waterproof rankings must be all wrong and you're the expert. Your remaining points only digress from the original topic and you try to explain to me where Apple was first. Sure, I'm well aware of all those, but that's completely unrelated to what we're discussing here. You still haven't answered why Apple wasn't able to implement this technology years ago and why they're only talking so much about waterproofing their new iPhone now and even releasing ads about it. What I'm trying to understand is if there were any limitations preventing them from doing so (although I can't imagine what would it be) or they simply ignored the industry trends for so long.
You're done here. You've offered nothing, made no sense, and shown that you do not respond to logic or common sense. Bye.
Well you're right, I'm done here, because apparently nobody is able to come up with reasonable answers to my questions. All I see here is various people blindly defending whatever Apple did (or didn't do, for that matter) and, at the same time, doubting industry standards and competing products at any cost and without any proper arguments. But I'm the troll here. Well fine then, let's all celebrate Apple for re-inventing waterproof smartphones and selling it as one of their major "new" features. Because you know, it's ok that advertising waterproof smartphones was a thing in 2014 and maybe 2015, Apple can still make it a novelty in 2016, right? Like I said, looking forward to their revolutionary wireless charging next year. Oh and revolutionary OLED screens as well, while we're at it. Some of you guys just don't seem to get the point I guess.
I don't need to see revolutionary new products from Apple every year. All I need is a reliable platform and Apple is still the only one I know. I'm fine with what Apple is today, I don't need the iPhone to become the next Xperia or Galaxy. But what I really don't like is when Apple plays catch up (nothing wrong with that) AND tries to turn it into their competitive advantage. That way I feel they're simply fooling their own customers. That's why I was trying to understand if there was any particular reason why they didn't implement this earlier. But I get it now, there's simply no reason.
I think you are not understanding marketing. It doesn't matter that others have done it before. And Apple is not claiming to have invented, re-invented or re-defined waterproofing. But it is a feature and one definitely worth mentioning. Also, I don't understand why you think people here have a duty to explain something they obviously don't know for certain. There could be a number of reasons why they did not implement waterproofing earlier. What is your take? Unless you are a conspiracy theorist your explanation will likely be as good as anyone else's.
IMO thats the best iPhone ad in years. It's bad ass, its powerful, and yet elusive. No corny voice over or trendy, annoying music. Just strong visuals, and just enough of the phone to make you want to see it in person. Reminds me very much of the MacPro video a couple years ago. Video starts at 1:40
That commercial is geared toward the informed crowd (who already knew about the new features of iPhone 7)... for the rest of the crowd, it'll just fly right over their head...
I'm keen on the jet black Plus because it reminds me of Bender.
Bender is foghorn grey. in fact, I bet you can get a sticker or case for the iPhone 7 Plus not too long from know that will make the back of your iPhone look like Bender Bending Rodriguez.
The add is about low light level photography with water resistence thrown in. Check all the photos. They are all low light level. That is when only the rods (?) in the eye are active and they see only B/W.
Comments
1. Samsung's phones, which claim an even higher ability to resist water damage, failed at providing even the water resistance now claimed by Apple. This should suggest to you that a phone with a headphone jack, charging port, movable Home button, and other buttons and mute/vibrate switch is not easy to make water resistant.
2. Apple's iPhone 6S survived, in many tests (you need only access to YouTube) a 30-second full immersion in a bowl of water. So Apple had previously taken steps toward water resistance, but acted conservatively in not claiming so in the previous generation.
3. In what manner was Apple, claiming water resistance as 1 of 10 enhancements to iPhone 7 "making it look like they just invented something nobody else has."
4. How is Apple NOT setting trends with
a) the first 64-bit smartphone (or had you forgotten),
b) the first, and best functioning, fingerprint sensor on a globally shipping smartphone. Someone else did one prior, but it didn't work well and wasn't widely shipped, and that makes ALL the difference,
c) the whole concept of vertical hardware/software/services integration, which makes iPhone perform better and use less power per unit of computing performance. That's something important to environmentally aware Apple, but apparently not to other companies, who are happy to just shove a bigger battery in their devices, and then try to charge that bigger battery fast, resulting in a global recall.
I could go on...
It's difficult.
Do you also have a list of features other manufacturers should not have advertised in their own phones? (Not that I care, I have an iPhone and don't really follow other manufacturers.)
Also, why does it matter at all why Apple didn't implement "waterproofing technology" prior to this? That seems irrelevant. Here's why: because they didn't. Just like the iPhone 6+/6s+ didn't have dual cameras.
I don't need to see revolutionary new products from Apple every year. All I need is a reliable platform and Apple is still the only one I know. I'm fine with what Apple is today, I don't need the iPhone to become the next Xperia or Galaxy. But what I really don't like is when Apple plays catch up (nothing wrong with that) AND tries to turn it into their competitive advantage. That way I feel they're simply fooling their own customers. That's why I was trying to understand if there was any particular reason why they didn't implement this earlier. But I get it now, there's simply no reason.